Am 18.04.2017 um 03:41 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes:
> 
>> David Turner <dtur...@twosigma.com> writes:
>>
>>> @@ -250,14 +250,14 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* 
>>> ret_pid)
>>> ...
>>>     if (!force) {
>>> -           static char locking_host[128];
>>> +           static char locking_host[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1];
>>>             int should_exit;
>>>             fp = fopen(pidfile_path, "r");
>>>             memset(locking_host, 0, sizeof(locking_host));
>>
>> I compared the result of applying this v2 directly on top of master
>> and applying René's "Use HOST_NAME_MAX"and then applying your v1.
>> This hunk is the only difference.
>>
>> As this locking_host is used like so in the later part of the code:
>>
>>                      time(NULL) - st.st_mtime <= 12 * 3600 &&
>>                      fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host) == 2 
>> &&
>>                      /* be gentle to concurrent "gc" on remote hosts */
>>                      (strcmp(locking_host, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || 
>> errno == EPERM);
>>
>> I suspect that turning it to HOST_NAME_MAX + 1 without tweaking
>> the format "%127c" gives us an inconsistent resulting code.

Oh, missed that.  Thanks for catching it!

>> Of course, my_host is sized to HOST_NAME_MAX + 1 and we are
>> comparing it with locking_host, so perhaps we'd need to take this
>> version to size locking_host to also HOST_NAME_MAX + 1, and then
>> scan with %255c (but then shouldn't we scan with %256c instead?  I
>> am not sure where these +1 comes from).
> 
> That is, something along this line...
> 
>   builtin/gc.c | 6 +++++-
>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c
> index be75508292..4f85610d87 100644
> --- a/builtin/gc.c
> +++ b/builtin/gc.c
> @@ -240,7 +240,11 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* 
> ret_pid)
>                                      LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR);
>       if (!force) {
>               static char locking_host[HOST_NAME_MAX + 1];
> +             static char *scan_fmt;
>               int should_exit;
> +
> +             if (!scan_fmt)
> +                     scan_fmt = xstrfmt("%s %%%dc", "%"SCNuMAX, 
> HOST_NAME_MAX);
>               fp = fopen(pidfile_path, "r");
>               memset(locking_host, 0, sizeof(locking_host));
>               should_exit =
> @@ -256,7 +260,7 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* 
> ret_pid)
>                        * running.
>                        */
>                       time(NULL) - st.st_mtime <= 12 * 3600 &&
> -                     fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host) == 2 
> &&
> +                     fscanf(fp, scan_fmt, &pid, locking_host) == 2 &&
>                       /* be gentle to concurrent "gc" on remote hosts */
>                       (strcmp(locking_host, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || 
> errno == EPERM);
>               if (fp != NULL)
> 

How important is it to scan the whole file in one call?  We could split
it up like this and use a strbuf to handle host names of any length.  We
need to be permissive here to allow machines with different values for
HOST_NAME_MAX to work with the same file on a network file system, so
this would have to be the first patch, right?

NB: That && cascade has enough meat for a whole function.

René

---
 builtin/gc.c | 10 +++++-----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c
index 1fca84c19d..d5e880028e 100644
--- a/builtin/gc.c
+++ b/builtin/gc.c
@@ -251,10 +251,9 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* 
ret_pid)
        fd = hold_lock_file_for_update(&lock, pidfile_path,
                                       LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR);
        if (!force) {
-               static char locking_host[128];
+               static struct strbuf locking_host = STRBUF_INIT;
                int should_exit;
                fp = fopen(pidfile_path, "r");
-               memset(locking_host, 0, sizeof(locking_host));
                should_exit =
                        fp != NULL &&
                        !fstat(fileno(fp), &st) &&
@@ -268,9 +267,10 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* 
ret_pid)
                         * running.
                         */
                        time(NULL) - st.st_mtime <= 12 * 3600 &&
-                       fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" %127c", &pid, locking_host) == 2 
&&
+                       fscanf(fp, "%"SCNuMAX" ", &pid) == 1 &&
+                       !strbuf_getwholeline(&locking_host, fp, '\0') &&
                        /* be gentle to concurrent "gc" on remote hosts */
-                       (strcmp(locking_host, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || 
errno == EPERM);
+                       (strcmp(locking_host.buf, my_host) || !kill(pid, 0) || 
errno == EPERM);
                if (fp != NULL)
                        fclose(fp);
                if (should_exit) {
@@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ static const char *lock_repo_for_gc(int force, pid_t* 
ret_pid)
                                rollback_lock_file(&lock);
                        *ret_pid = pid;
                        free(pidfile_path);
-                       return locking_host;
+                       return locking_host.buf;
                }
        }
 
-- 
2.12.2

Reply via email to